User:Immcarle125/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: NLRP
 * I chose this article because it is a relevant topic to biological processes in immunology, specifically innate immunity as NLRP acts as a NOD-like receptor.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead of this article includes a concise guiding sentence that briefly defines the topic. This first paragraph then continues to describe the function of NLRP as well as how it can be related to human hereditary diseases and current research. It is a very basic introduction, briefly touching on the major sections of the article, therefore, the lead is good.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content of the article is relevant to the topic and always connects to the protein being described. There are no references from the past 5 years, so the content can be updated. Each section is simply 2-3 sentences long, and I encourage more elaboration and search for relevant references to be included. Also, including images or figures would be helpful.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
The article remains neutral and presents facts. There does not to seem to be any bias or persuasion throughout the many sections of the article.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
There are several sources cited in the article that refer to the references mentioned as well as other reliable Wikipedia articles via links. I believe more recent literature can be found related to the topic and a more thorough search should be conducted.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is well-written and does not include any grammatical or spelling errors. I found it to be very easy to read and there was a clear organization in understanding the functioning and expression of the protein in the immune system as well as applying it to diseases in the human body.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
There are no images or figures used in the article to enhance the understanding of the topic.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
The talk page does not include any conversations, however, there is an assigned student to the page and revisions have been made recently.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
My overall impression of this article's status is that it has a stable foundation, however, more content such as figures or images must be added. There is a reliable and clear structure to the article and with additional work, it can be developed into a more usable resource.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: Talk:NLRP